Yes, I think that this may be considered the central problem.
It's easier to compare two different scenarios with a standard measure and to use kilos to compare apples and oranges, for instance.
The problem is to understand that oranges will continue to be oranges after this measure, and apples will continue to be apples.
This is an example to say that several countries focus their contest in quality, some others in quantity.
The prize and the contest, anyway, is focused to select the "better photo" and not the biggest uploaders.
It means that there is no sense to force the quantitative parameters while the incentives are focused to increase quality.
Personally I find the same measure costs/uploads a lot far from the most correct measure costs/benefits because we cannot consider a single upload automatically as a "benefit".
In my opinion the most critical point is how measure costs (the workload of a community is it a cost?) and the benefits (a huge amount of worst photos is it a benefit?) because it involves several not measurable parameters.
Regards
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
Figuring out what ideas are repeatable, scalable, or awesome but one-time only, is complex. We probably need many different approaches, not one central approach, to understand and compare.